Introduction

“Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all
liberties”.1 – John Milton

Freedom of speech and expression is granted a high importance in the Indian Constitution,
which guarantees its citizens "liberty of thought, literature, conscience, faith, and worship" in
the Preamble. The framers of the Indian Constitution guaranteed us fundamental freedoms of
speech and expression. Only a free and fair exchange of ideas will guarantee a democracy's
longevity. Individuals should not have the power to claim whatever comes to mind as they
exercise their right to free expression. Expression does not aggravate or influence people to
commit a crime that disrupts public order and prosperity, or causes hatred against members of
a particular caste, culture, or religion, or some other kind of expression that tarnishes the
picture of another individual. According to Article 19(1), people have the right to freedom of
speech and expression (a). Allowable restrictions set out in article 19(2) in the context of
equal limitations should always be applied to such speech. As a consequence, the
interpretation of evidence can not be regarded as a form of free speech.

Meaning of freedom of speech and expression

Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution guarantees all in India the right to free speech and
expression. The statute states that “all citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and
expression.” According to Article 19, “reasonable limitations can be imposed on the practise
of this right for those purposes” (2). Any prohibition on exercising the right levied under
Article 19(1)(a) that does not fall under the four corners of Article 19(2) is unconstitutional.

Article 19(1) guarantees the right to express oneself on any subject using any medium,
including words, broadcasting, printing, photography, films, and movies (a). As a result, it
protects both freedom of expression and the right to disseminate or publish ideas. However,
under Article 19, this privilege is subject to fair limitations. (2.) The ability to make
unfounded and reckless statements against the judiciary should not be confused with the right
to free speech.

It's worth noting that the state's existence, as well as its inaction, can stifle a citizen's right to
free expression. As a result, the State's failure to grant all of its people the universal right to
freedom of expression, regardless of their circumstances or social status, will be a breach of
Article 19 of the Constitution (1) (a.)

One of the most important aspects of a representative society is the universal right to freedom
of speech and opinion, which enables people to engage freely and actively in the country's
social and political processes. Equality of speech and expression, in reality, broadens and
deepens democracy, elevating it from a natural state to one of political and social
participation. This privilege is only applicable to Indian citizens; foreign nationals are not

1
John Milton Quotes. (n.d.). BrainyQuote.com. Retrieved April 23, 2021, from
BrainyQuote.com Web site: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/john_milton_401382
qualified. In the interests of India's democracy and independence, the people's welfare, good
ties with foreign states, public protection, decency, and morals, as well as contempt of court,
slander, and incitement to an offence, the government must enact laws that impose fair
constraints on this right.

What does freedom of speech and expression entail?

While the terms "voice" and "language" seem to be self-explanatory, the court has
constitutionally construed this constitutional right to require the following:

1. The ability to openly communicate one's thoughts and feelings, whether by

voice, writing, or reading, is known as freedom of expression.
2. It necessitates the right to express and disseminate one's own views. This
therefore necessitates the right to disseminate or publish the views of others;
otherwise, the press would be excluded from this privilege.
3. It necessitates the freedom to express itself, as well as the freedom to seek,
receive, and convey information and ideas, whether orally, in prose, or by
lawfully regulated visual or auditory instruments like the radio,
cinematography, gramophone, loudspeaker, and so on.
4. It necessitates the freedom to be informed, which entails the desire to not only
submit but also receive and import suggestions and insights from others on
mutually beneficial topics.
5. The ability to communicate includes the right to remain quiet. It encompasses
both the ability to continue to listen and the privilege to refuse to be forced to
listen. The right to be cured of whatever it is that one wants to be free of is
included in the luxury. Several schoolchildren were punished in the case of
Bijoe Emmanuel vs. State of Kerala (1986) for failing to sing the National
Anthem. The children belonged to the Jehovah's Witnesses, a religious sect
that believes in only one God, Jehovah the Creator, and no one else. They
chose not to sing the National Anthem because it contradicted their own
values. The youth, on the other hand, showed respect for the national anthem
by standing silently through its performance and without interrupting it.

Freedom of press
The right to freedom of the press isn't stated in the Constitution at all. However, it is
expressly recognised as a privilege under Article 12 of the Constitution's definition of
freedom of speech and expression.If democracy is described as government by the people, by
the people, and by the people, therefore everybody must be able to engage in the democratic
process. There can be no democratic speech or open debates without a free and unbiased
press.The press freedom is one of the foundations of democracy and is, in reality, the
backbone of political organisation. The Supreme Court of India has held in several judgments
that press freedom is a part of the Freedom of Speech and Expression protected under Article
19(1)(a), since press freedom is nothing more than an element of freedom of speech and
expression. As a result, it has been correctly clarified that, although the press is regarded as a
means for communicating people's opinions to the masses, it must adhere to the restrictions
placed on it by the Constitution under Article 19(2).

Restriction on Freedom of Expression

1. Security of the State

In the protection of state security, fair limitations on freedom of speech and expression may
be enforced under Article 19 (2). Since it is so vital, the government has the authority to
impose limits on actions that jeopardise the state's protection. Person freedom of speech and
opinion, for example, whether he is impelling or encouraging the execution of a felony, are
matters that would jeopardise state protection. That person may be subjected to restrictions.

2. Friendly Relation with Foreign States

In the interest of good ties with foreign states, reasonable restrictions on freedom of speech
and expression can be enforced. It is a well-established principle in international law that the
state is liable for the actions of those within its authority. With this idea in view, the current
judicial code has provided allowances for libel against heads of state to be punished. In
England, for example, someone who creates some sort of libel that endangers the Crown's
peaceful ties with other foreign states is punished by the constitution.

3. Sovereignty and Integrity of India

The Constitution (16th Amendment) Act, 1963 attached this basis to Article 19 (2) since it is
the most important obligation to protect India's supremacy and dignity. This restricts freedom
of speech and expression and makes it impossible for someone to question India's
sovereignty. It forbids anybody from saying something that could jeopardise India's
sovereignty.

4. Public Order

To address the situations arising from the Supreme Court's ruling, the Constitution (1st
Amendment) Act of 1951 incorporated this basis to the constitution. The Supreme Court
decided in the case of Romesh Thapar v. State of Madras 2 that public order is distinct
from state protection and law and order. There are therefore no reasons for enforcing
limits on public safety, as seen in the case of municipal violations of public order.
According to the Supreme Court, public order is an act of public health, stability, and
tranquillity. In this situation, the statute in the State of Madras prohibited the publication
of a Journal in the name of public order. The court ruled that the government's
prohibitions were based solely on the premises set out in Article 19. (2). As a result of the
Supreme Court's ruling, the term "public order" was applied to Article 19 (2) of the
Constitution to place such limits on freedom of speech and expression.

5. Morality and decency

Sections 292 to 294 of the IPC describe the terms decency and morals. It gives the
government the authority to impose limits on freedom of speech and expression. These

2
Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras[18]' AIR 1950 SC 124
provisions of the IPC prohibit the public dissemination or selling of indecent books and other
materials.

6. Contempt of Court

Contempt of court is prohibited by the right to freedom of speech and expression. Equality of
speech and expression should be limited in a fair way. Section 2 of the 1971 Contempt of
Courts Act defines contempt of justice. It also applies to both civil and criminal contempt.
However, in 2006, the Indian Contempt Law was revised to include honesty as a protection.

7. Defamation

Article 19(2) places a limitation on a person's ability to make a defamatory comment that
harms another person's credibility. That a person's integrity in society is essential, the
constitution restricts freedom of speech. Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code
render defamation an offence. The right to freedom of speech and expression would not
confer full rights on everyone. It does not grant someone the freedom to damage any person's
integrity.

8. Incitement to Commit a Crime

Incitement was applied as an offence ground by the Constitution (1st Amendment Act) of
1951. People cannot perform an offence because of their right to freedom of speech and
expression. The term "offence" is described in the General Clause Act as "any act or omission
committed by an individual that is punished by any statute in effect at the time."

The above study clearly shows that the grounds set out in Article 19 (2) are concerned with
India's national security and societal interests. National security is dealing with issues such as
India's integrity, state security, civil safety, and good relations with foreign countries.
Whereas decency and justice, contempt of court, slander, and incitement to an offence are
reasons linked to it in the interest of society.

Conclusion
In the case of Romesh Thappar vs The State Of Madras (1950) 3, the Hon'ble Supreme Court
of India rightly stated that freedom of speech and expression is at the core of all democratic
organisations. As a consequence, freedom of speech is critical in a democracy. As a
consequence, we may deduce that India's Constituent Assembly conferred the privilege of
freedom of speech on us. However, in the current scenario, the blessing that has been
conferred upon humanity is being abused in such a way that citizens are suffering. Since there
is a possibility that the freedom of free speech may be violated, the use of social media and
other services for the purpose of sending messages to individuals must be scrutinised. Civic
meetings and debates are at the heart of a democratic nation, and they will help the
government and authorities improve their methods of service such that citizens believe the
state is really a welfare state that cares for their well-being. As a consequence, wise and
informed use of the freedom to share and disseminate truthful facts will help to build a stable
society and realise the Welfare State hope..

3
Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras[18]' AIR 1950 SC 124